Why would I want to spend my time with a game full of AI generation, when I could play one that had real actual people craft the work.
Because people have different skill sets, and I’d argue that for someone who has no skills in drawing, using AI as a tool to help add a little polish is not worse than pulling a generic already-seen asset pack from [your favourite game engine]'s marketplace. It all depends on how much, and how, AI is used.
Of course this only applies to indie developers and small studios. Big studios can afford to and should hire artists and designers.
I’d rather play an ugly game with crappy art made by a human. I genuinely don’t understand this “but it isn’t pretty” mentality.
I’d say a game developer that has so little respect for their craft as to resort to generative AI does not deserve my time , my money or my attention. There are already a lot of games out there that have some passion for what they are doing and have respect for human work.
Ok, you do you.
I don’t need to use llm’s for anything if that is what you are asking and I certainly support human creators. a prompt is not creating anything it is a coin in a vending machine.
If it’s used to generate and populate things like bushes, rocks, trees, etc, I really don’t care.
Nope. This is literally the same RMVP move. Having one person curate my experience of Steam is bounds for arbitration.
If you as a consumer do not want GAN, nuance what you do not want to see generated.
Procedural generation is one of the reasons I came for gaming, so a killfile on a description isn’t enough to expose to me what I tolerate from asset training.
My hope is that generative ai will kill pixel art because pixel art is ugly and genai can be really beautiful
I like both of them, tbh. Only thing I’m tired of is games looking like Fortnite.
